On Monday 01 Mar 2010 5:55:41 pm Jirka Vejrazka wrote:
> >> Then maybe web server is the best option. In all cases you have to
> >> configure something until someday 'runserver' come with ssl support.
>
> I think that no one would really object if runserver was SSL-aware,
>
or you could have a
>> Then maybe web server is the best option. In all cases you have to
>> configure something until someday 'runserver' come with ssl support.
I think that no one would really object if runserver was SSL-aware,
however people requesting it need to be aware that having an SSL-aware
webserver is si
El 01/03/10 08:18, Adnan Sadzak escribió:
> Then maybe web server is the best option. In all cases you have to
> configure something until someday 'runserver' come with ssl support.
It doesn't seem like that day will ever come:
"""
DON'T use this server in anything resembling a production environ
Then maybe web server is the best option. In all cases you have to configure
something until someday 'runserver' come with ssl support.
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Ian Lewis wrote:
> I can think of a number of reasons why you would want to test SSL
> behavior on your local machine before r
I can think of a number of reasons why you would want to test SSL
behavior on your local machine before running it on a production
server. Setup can be pretty annoying for one.
I wrote a blog post on how to do this very thing a while back. I used
stunnel, as Janusz mentioned, to test SSL redirect
El 01/03/10 07:07, cool-RR escribió:
> Adnan, I'm really baffled by your response. No, my reasons for using
> SSL here is not because I'm afraid someone will sniff my data, We are
> talking here about `runserver`, which is the development server which
> is never used for production. The goal of `ru
Adnan, I'm really baffled by your response. No, my reasons for using SSL
here is not because I'm afraid someone will sniff my data, We are talking
here about `runserver`, which is the development server which is never used
for production. The goal of `runserver` is to be able to easily test how
you
If it's on your local machine there is no big sense to use ssl unles you are
paranoid. If someone can sniff local traffic, then ssl is useless.
Anyway, as Janusz said http://www.stunnel.org/
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:06 AM, Janusz Harkot wrote:
> So you can use stunnel: http://www.stunnel.org/
>
>
So you can use stunnel: http://www.stunnel.org/
J.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-us...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users+unsubscr...@googl
I'm not using Apache on my development machine and I don't want to use
it. I enjoy the low headache factor of runserver. But it'll be nicer
if it served through https as well.
On Mar 1, 12:53 am, Andrej wrote:
> because you need to load apache ssl gear. Set up your normal virtual
> host and then
because you need to load apache ssl gear. Set up your normal virtual
host and then use reverse proxy:
ProxyPass / http://localhost:8000/
ProxyPassReverse / http://localhost:8000/
On Feb 28, 5:09 pm, cool-RR wrote:
> Why doesn't runserver automatically serve in https as well as http? It
11 matches
Mail list logo
